Gatwick Direct MAY/MID
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London Under EGLL(LHR) 27R ILS
Age: 31
Posts: 500
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gatwick Direct MAY/MID
Hi,
Just a few questions, Ive seen regularly at night time, the pattern is no longer on a star, aircraft are normally routed Direct MAY or MID (In case of 08R) I can tell by there pattern its more direct instead of the standard star pattern "WILLO4C in mind".
Is the phraseology something like "BAW2709, Route Direct Mayfield (MAY), landing 26L, affectively no delay, decend FL130 abeam Goodwood (GWC)" from London control before being handed to Gatwick abeam Goodwood, or at a later point?
Im not really sure but I see airspeeds in the region of 280knts below FL100, is this restriction normally cancelled to keep the plane as clean as and CDA as much as possible?
Thanks in advanced.
Just a few questions, Ive seen regularly at night time, the pattern is no longer on a star, aircraft are normally routed Direct MAY or MID (In case of 08R) I can tell by there pattern its more direct instead of the standard star pattern "WILLO4C in mind".
Is the phraseology something like "BAW2709, Route Direct Mayfield (MAY), landing 26L, affectively no delay, decend FL130 abeam Goodwood (GWC)" from London control before being handed to Gatwick abeam Goodwood, or at a later point?
Im not really sure but I see airspeeds in the region of 280knts below FL100, is this restriction normally cancelled to keep the plane as clean as and CDA as much as possible?
Thanks in advanced.
Location, Location, Location
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: If it moves, watch it like a hawk: If it doesn't, hit it with a hammer until it does...
Age: 60
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
Just a few questions. I've observed regularly at night time that the pattern is seemingly no longer on a STAR for Gatwick arrivals from the southeast and southwest. At these times aircraft are apparantly routed direct MAY (or MID In case of 08R). I feel that their pattern is more 'direct' instead of the standard star routing.
Is the phraseology something like "BAW2709, Route Direct Mayfield (MAY), landing 26L, (effectively) no delay, descend FL130 abeam Goodwood (GWC)" from London control before being handed to Gatwick abeam Goodwood; or does the handoff occur at a later point?
I'm not really sure why, but I have observed airspeeds in the region of 280knts below FL100. Is the speed restriction normally cancelled to keep the plane as clean as possible while not compromising a CDA?
Thanks in advance.
Just a few questions. I've observed regularly at night time that the pattern is seemingly no longer on a STAR for Gatwick arrivals from the southeast and southwest. At these times aircraft are apparantly routed direct MAY (or MID In case of 08R). I feel that their pattern is more 'direct' instead of the standard star routing.
Is the phraseology something like "BAW2709, Route Direct Mayfield (MAY), landing 26L, (effectively) no delay, descend FL130 abeam Goodwood (GWC)" from London control before being handed to Gatwick abeam Goodwood; or does the handoff occur at a later point?
I'm not really sure why, but I have observed airspeeds in the region of 280knts below FL100. Is the speed restriction normally cancelled to keep the plane as clean as possible while not compromising a CDA?
Thanks in advance.
Nothing to see hear<sic>
Last edited by mocoman; 23rd Sep 2009 at 02:58.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arch.. Well, life gets a bit difficult with Robbie's spelling and grammar. However....
One must remember that ATC may not always wish to keep to standard routes, perhaps due to traffic, weather or simply expedition.
Precise phraseology cannot be laid down for every situation so one can only guess at what might be said in a particular situation. I never worked at Gatwick but for Heathrow... on westerlies, traffic heading for a LAM Star might be given an early turn for a straight in and be told "Turn left heading 250 for a straight in on 27L". On easterlies, there are early "snatches" for BNN and OCK traffic on to long base legs. The release to the Approach, or Intermediate, Directors can be at a time, level or point after communication is established with Int Dir. Again, precise phraseology is not laid down for such situations and a radar heading will be given followed by an explanation of what's happening: "Turn right heading 180, long base-leg for 09L", etc.
HTH
One must remember that ATC may not always wish to keep to standard routes, perhaps due to traffic, weather or simply expedition.
Precise phraseology cannot be laid down for every situation so one can only guess at what might be said in a particular situation. I never worked at Gatwick but for Heathrow... on westerlies, traffic heading for a LAM Star might be given an early turn for a straight in and be told "Turn left heading 250 for a straight in on 27L". On easterlies, there are early "snatches" for BNN and OCK traffic on to long base legs. The release to the Approach, or Intermediate, Directors can be at a time, level or point after communication is established with Int Dir. Again, precise phraseology is not laid down for such situations and a radar heading will be given followed by an explanation of what's happening: "Turn right heading 180, long base-leg for 09L", etc.
HTH
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 24/7 Hardcore Heaven
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On 26L a/c can be released to KK DIR at MAY or DET (for a straight-in).On 08R we use MAY, MID or GWC. For example, an a/c routing into WILLO from the south west can be released at GWC enabling it to be turned straight onto base leg for 08R ( subject to it being at a reasonable height).
Happens quite frequently during the day too depending on traffic levels i.e if there is no holding.
Happens quite frequently during the day too depending on traffic levels i.e if there is no holding.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: southeast UK
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All of which prompts a question.
If you want to change airspace dimensions, amend routes or introduce new routes (below 7,000ft) you have to go through an Airspace Change Proposal which includes and Environmental Impact Study. This can take years and as we have seen with the TC North planned change the environmental issue can be a bit of a problem.
So where does this leave ATCOs taking traffic off approved STARs onto new routes based on tactical availability when traffic levels permit? These 'new routes' have not been assessed for environmental impact.
Just an idle thought....
If you want to change airspace dimensions, amend routes or introduce new routes (below 7,000ft) you have to go through an Airspace Change Proposal which includes and Environmental Impact Study. This can take years and as we have seen with the TC North planned change the environmental issue can be a bit of a problem.
So where does this leave ATCOs taking traffic off approved STARs onto new routes based on tactical availability when traffic levels permit? These 'new routes' have not been assessed for environmental impact.
Just an idle thought....
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VC.. Assume you are not in aviation? There are defined routes for aircraft to fly for flight planning purposes, but these routes are contained within large chunks of controlled airspace. In very busy areas, eg London Terminal Area, it would be impossible for all aircraft to fly just the set routes and there must be leeway for radar controllers to keep them separated. It does not mean that airspace dimensions change or new routes introduced, it's just that to expedite traffic air traffic controllers frequently use the controlled airspace available to them to keep things flowing.
HTH
HTH
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
V C
The flights all take place in what is established Controlled Airspace. To be blunt, controllers can do what they want within this airspace so the Environmental Imapact Study has no relevance. This study would have included the airspace as a whole, not just routes within it.
In fact from a tree huggers point of view it is actually preferential because the aircraft are being given shortcuts, therefore flying for a few minutes less than they would if they flew the full routes.
Over a period of say a year those minutes actually add up to quite a fuel saving and therefore quite a sizeable reduction in production of greenhouse gasses.
On the other side of the coin, from a NIMBY point of view of course these shortcuts might be inconvenient.
The fact of the matter is, the amount of tree hugging environmentalists who would welcome overflights of their house if it meant that aircraft were being more efficient would, I expect, be minimal.
As for the TC North consultation, the routes and airspace were approved to NATS satisfaction after consultation - the problems that have arisen since are to do with practicality from an ATC point of view - any revision of airspace/route design is to do with that, not environmental issues.
Unfortunately what a lot of local residents don't realise when these consultations happen is that the Governement ultimately give approval for new runways, increased passenger numbers etc - often against advice from NATS. The redesign of routes and airspace in these instances is carried out to ensure safety and as much efficiency as possible. Many people often believe, mistakenly, that NATS are doing it for the hell of it!!!
The flights all take place in what is established Controlled Airspace. To be blunt, controllers can do what they want within this airspace so the Environmental Imapact Study has no relevance. This study would have included the airspace as a whole, not just routes within it.
In fact from a tree huggers point of view it is actually preferential because the aircraft are being given shortcuts, therefore flying for a few minutes less than they would if they flew the full routes.
Over a period of say a year those minutes actually add up to quite a fuel saving and therefore quite a sizeable reduction in production of greenhouse gasses.
On the other side of the coin, from a NIMBY point of view of course these shortcuts might be inconvenient.
The fact of the matter is, the amount of tree hugging environmentalists who would welcome overflights of their house if it meant that aircraft were being more efficient would, I expect, be minimal.
As for the TC North consultation, the routes and airspace were approved to NATS satisfaction after consultation - the problems that have arisen since are to do with practicality from an ATC point of view - any revision of airspace/route design is to do with that, not environmental issues.
Unfortunately what a lot of local residents don't realise when these consultations happen is that the Governement ultimately give approval for new runways, increased passenger numbers etc - often against advice from NATS. The redesign of routes and airspace in these instances is carried out to ensure safety and as much efficiency as possible. Many people often believe, mistakenly, that NATS are doing it for the hell of it!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London Under EGLL(LHR) 27R ILS
Age: 31
Posts: 500
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arch.. Well, life gets a bit difficult with Robbie's spelling and grammar. However....
On 26L a/c can be released to KK DIR at MAY or DET (for a straight-in).On 08R we use MAY, MID or GWC. For example, an a/c routing into WILLO from the south west can be released at GWC enabling it to be turned straight onto base leg for 08R ( subject to it being at a reasonable height).
Thanks Guys,
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<I did get a double C in English GCSE though >>
Well you probably did much better than me at school. However, I check and re-check what I have written before pressing the "submit" key in an attempt to ensure that those reading it will have some idea of what I mean. You really need to sort out your problems if you are ever going to get a professional job..
Well you probably did much better than me at school. However, I check and re-check what I have written before pressing the "submit" key in an attempt to ensure that those reading it will have some idea of what I mean. You really need to sort out your problems if you are ever going to get a professional job..
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: southeast UK
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wondering where these quotes from CAP725 requiring an ACP to be submitted fit in...
c) The introduction of, or changes to, Standard Instrument Departure routes (SIDs), Standard Arrival Routes (STARs) or Noise Preferential Routes (NPRs) within controlled airspace. Standard Departure Routes (SDRs) and NPRs where they exist outside controlled airspace are not covered by this Process. However, aerodrome operators are strongly recommended to adopt the same principles when considering the need for new or amended SDRs and NPRs under these circumstances;
and
h) Changes to existing published terminal patterns and procedures where the net effect results in changes to the lateral dispersion or lowering in altitude of traffic within controlled airspace
So if NATS wanted to change the already published STARs into, lets say, EGKK they would to submit an ACP. But if a controller tactically wanted to take a short cut off a STAR then an ACP is not needed? Surely the 'net effect results in changes to the lateral dispersion'?
(..and I have worked in aviation for 35 years, just playing devils advocate)
c) The introduction of, or changes to, Standard Instrument Departure routes (SIDs), Standard Arrival Routes (STARs) or Noise Preferential Routes (NPRs) within controlled airspace. Standard Departure Routes (SDRs) and NPRs where they exist outside controlled airspace are not covered by this Process. However, aerodrome operators are strongly recommended to adopt the same principles when considering the need for new or amended SDRs and NPRs under these circumstances;
and
h) Changes to existing published terminal patterns and procedures where the net effect results in changes to the lateral dispersion or lowering in altitude of traffic within controlled airspace
So if NATS wanted to change the already published STARs into, lets say, EGKK they would to submit an ACP. But if a controller tactically wanted to take a short cut off a STAR then an ACP is not needed? Surely the 'net effect results in changes to the lateral dispersion'?
(..and I have worked in aviation for 35 years, just playing devils advocate)
Join Date: May 2007
Location: swanwick carp lake
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mr 777:
does this make the aircraft number one,or is it dependant on peer pressure?
UYA?
For example, an a/c routing into WILLO from the south west can be released at GWC enabling it to be turned straight onto base leg for 08R ( subject to it being at a reasonable height).
UYA?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ImnotanERIC.. I thought you were an ATCO??
I can only speak for Heathrow, but turning an aircraft off a STAR does not necessarily change it's position in the landing sequence so if it's turned early it may still be #2 or #3. Favourite at Heathrow on easterlies was for the TMA to turn inbounds from the SW towards WOD rather than OCK but at the time the decision was made the exact landing order may not have been decided. We could just see gaps in the sequence which we could fill with an early turn...
HTH...
I can only speak for Heathrow, but turning an aircraft off a STAR does not necessarily change it's position in the landing sequence so if it's turned early it may still be #2 or #3. Favourite at Heathrow on easterlies was for the TMA to turn inbounds from the SW towards WOD rather than OCK but at the time the decision was made the exact landing order may not have been decided. We could just see gaps in the sequence which we could fill with an early turn...
HTH...
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
V C
Essentialy, correct. For it to be a promulgated route, published etc, an ACP would be needed. I believe there are varying degrees of consultation though - someone involved in projects might be able to confirm or refute this - if the new route was to take place in airspace already delegated as say, Class A, then the consultation would not be as lengthy - may almost be a rubber stamp job.
NATS are currently looking at nighttime OPs to see what shortcuts are regularly given - then these may be incorporated into publications and procedures. The reason for this is that when giving an aircraft a shortcut it might not always be in the best interests of the airline as it is not the published route (again, I only know the gist of it, not the nuts and bolts - more an airlines Ops subject).
If these new routes were incorporated as nighttime procedures I think it would just be a rubber stamp job to get it through.
The real difficulty comes when new routes etc require new airspace...
.
So if NATS wanted to change the already published STARs into, lets say, EGKK they would to submit an ACP. But if a controller tactically wanted to take a short cut off a STAR then an ACP is not needed?
NATS are currently looking at nighttime OPs to see what shortcuts are regularly given - then these may be incorporated into publications and procedures. The reason for this is that when giving an aircraft a shortcut it might not always be in the best interests of the airline as it is not the published route (again, I only know the gist of it, not the nuts and bolts - more an airlines Ops subject).
If these new routes were incorporated as nighttime procedures I think it would just be a rubber stamp job to get it through.
The real difficulty comes when new routes etc require new airspace...
.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Surrey, Uk
Age: 72
Posts: 1,585
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been retired now for 7 years so am very much out of touch. (some would probably say I never really was in touch)
If Heathrow were on easterlies and it was quiet, traffic coming into BIG we would send from about abeam Gatwick direct to OCK and release the aircraft at OCK. Does that still happen now ?
Also Gatwick inbounds from the north via WOD/MID we could give radar vectors and position them downwind right for runway 26L, descending them to four thousand feet and transferring them when they were clean against Heathrow DVR departures and Gatwick right turnouts. Could be a bit sporty sometimes. Does that still happen now ?
Happy days.
CG.
If Heathrow were on easterlies and it was quiet, traffic coming into BIG we would send from about abeam Gatwick direct to OCK and release the aircraft at OCK. Does that still happen now ?
Also Gatwick inbounds from the north via WOD/MID we could give radar vectors and position them downwind right for runway 26L, descending them to four thousand feet and transferring them when they were clean against Heathrow DVR departures and Gatwick right turnouts. Could be a bit sporty sometimes. Does that still happen now ?
Happy days.
CG.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 'right-hand downwinds' at LGW seemed to start to fade around 2002 (when did you retire?
) Used to ask for them frequently but the success rate dwindled.
) Used to ask for them frequently but the success rate dwindled.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Surrey, Uk
Age: 72
Posts: 1,585
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOAC,
I retired Sept. 2002.
We could only offer downwind right when it was very quiet.
The problem was the Heathrow DVR sids coming off climbing to six thousand feet and the Gatwick CLN/LAM and DVR sids climbing to four thousand feet. It was always a very fine juggling act to get the timing right.
As both airports got busier it became more difficult to offer.
CG.
I retired Sept. 2002.
We could only offer downwind right when it was very quiet.
The problem was the Heathrow DVR sids coming off climbing to six thousand feet and the Gatwick CLN/LAM and DVR sids climbing to four thousand feet. It was always a very fine juggling act to get the timing right.
As both airports got busier it became more difficult to offer.
CG.